Nader attack: your posting

[Lisa & Ian Murray]

A steady-state capitalist economy is pretty hard to imagine, and
Aarons wasn't about to imagine anything beyond capitalism. So he was
right from his point of view. If I remember right, he was also
responding to a Malthusian questioner, who wanted no economic growth,
and Aarons was simply doing the math of 0 GDP growth plus >0 pop
growth = declining per capita income. That too is irrefutable if you
think capitalism eternal.

Doug
======

Agreed, an SSCE is virtually out of the Q, and Aarons didn't seem like
someone who had any imagination.  Word to me was the question came from
Canadian enviro. lawyer Steve Shrybman who is no Malthusian [even though he
hangs with the IFG crowd]. I imagine that if the questions were verbal
rather than written we would have had a much needed debate on this issue of
national and international methods for measuring the economist's favorite
metaphor.  I vote for the fact they're crap...Me thinks V. Shiva came up
with the only sound bite concept the whole evening which might be worth
holding onto and try to define after all we've tried to learn after 1989;
economic democracy.  She was good on imperialism.

Ian